ROSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Chowkidar with effect from 6.2.1985 to June 1986. He worked as Helper with effect from July, 1986 to March, 1988. He worked as Mechanic Grade-II with effect from April, 1988 to March, 1989. He worked as Fitter 1st Grade with effect from April, 1989 to February, 1994. Thereafter he worked as Complaint Attendant with effect from March, 1994 to March, 1995. He is seeking regularization against the post of Complaint Attendant after completion of 10 years of service. Case of the respondents, in nutshell, is that since the petitioner has not worked for 10 years on one single post, his services could not be regularized.

(2.) Mr. B.B. Vaid has vehemently argued that action of the respondents of not regularizing services of the petitioner after completion of 10 years is illegal, arbitrary, discrimination, thus, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He then argued that similarly situate persons, namely, Krishan Singh and Gopal Chand have been regularized as Complaint Attendants and it is a case of invidious discrimination.

(3.) Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that since the petitioner has worked against various posts and has not completed 10 years continuous service on any post, his services could not be regularized. He has denied that the petitioner has been discriminated against by the respondents.